Deindividuation refers to a theory in the field of social psychology which is primarily believed to be the loss of self-awareness in terms of groups, although it is a topic facing great contention among scholars and experts (Chang, 2008) . Despite sociologists also engaging in the research on the concept of deindividuation, the scale of appraisal is somehow different. Scholars in the social psychology field note that the degree of analysis should concentrate on a person in the setting of a social case. As such, social psychologists dwell on the contribution of internal processes of psychology. Fields, for example, sociology focus more on the historical, political, economic, and social factors influencing the events occurring in a particular society (Li, 2010) . The decreased self-awareness and diffused responsibility supply the gasoline and wood for deindividuation, but without the trigger of social arousal, nothing occurs.
The process of deindividuation
Source: Perry (1998)
The figure above shows various factors that might contribute to deindividuation in the context of sports fans. As noted in the figure, several influences join to develop a feeling of diffused role, which limits the burden of responsibility that a person would normally apply to their actions. The mere act of being in presence of other individuals can enhance diminishing of a person’s sense of duty, illustrated by the fact that individuals are less likely to assist someone when others are nearby (Li, 2010) . In the presence of others, individuals are more likely to wait for another person to act or assume responsibility.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In addition to adding to the diffusion of duty, groups supply considerable degree of physical anonymity to their participants (Chang, 2008) . As a result, actions of a given person are difficult, or are believed difficult to determine, and as such, cannot be evaluated or judged. Particular people actually cannot be blamed when the crowd they are part of commences to hull obscenities, since no authority understand whether or not that person actually took part in the said activity (Chang, 2008) . Groups offer anonymity to individuals, something which lessens accountability assigned to a single person, in turn limiting their sense of duty.
Deindividuation in the absence of a crowd
There are studies which have analyzed instances where deindividuation occurs in the absence of a crowd. According to Chang (2008) , an anonymous individual, especially in the dark, would jeer or bait someone who is threatening to jump off a tower or tall building. This indicates that an anonymous individual, even in the absence of a crowd, but at a considerable distance from the crowd and in the cover of darkness, is more likely to exhibit the characteristics of deindividuation (Li, 2010) .
Historical event where deindividuation occurred
Sporting events provide a specific, illustrative example of social stimulation. Fans were watching the match, intensely engaged in the game and had started showcasing a degree of arousal. Then they were more aroused when the referee awarded a penalty, without understanding whether the decision was justified or not. Fans began screaming and yelling as the whistles, cries, and hurling of objectives at the referee grew to uncontrollable levels. Deindividuated people joined the picture at this juncture, when the fans were no longer self-aware. Self-awareness is experienced while crowds are still focused on the game and the crowd is so massive that they are incapable of being single-handedly held accountable for their conducts (Perry, 1998).
Controversy in deindividuation
Questions have emerged about the external soundness of research on deindividuation. As the theory has grown overtime, certain scholars believe that the concept has lost direction on the dynamic intergroup-group setting of collective behavior that it strives to shape (Chang, 2008) . Others suggest that deindividuation impacts may probably be a result of group habits; crowd behavior is constrained by habits emerging in a particular context. More conversantly, it is probably strange that while the concept of deindividuation posits that immersion happens as normative conduct, study in social psychology has also found that the presence of a crowd explains conformity to group standards and norms (Li, 2010) . Some experiments, for example, Milgram’s obedience researches illustrate compliance to the experimenter’s requirements; however, the study model in this examination is very similar to certain employ in deindividuation research, save for the responsibility of the researcher which fails to consider any accounts of such incidences (Chang, 2008) .
Conclusion
Concepts of deindividuation suggest that it concerns a psychological situation of diminished evaluation-apprehension or self-evaluation causing disinhibitive and antimortive conduct. Deindividuation as a concept seeks to offer an explanation for a myriad of antimortive collective conduct, including lynch mobs and violent crowds, among others. The theory has further been adapted to understanding genocide and has been offered as a clarification for antimortive online conduct as well as in computer-mediated interactions or communications. Despite generally being appraised in the setting of negative conducts, such as genocide and mob violence, deindividuation is found useful in understanding certain positive experience and behaviors. Overall, there still exists certain variation as to comprehend the contribution of deindividuation in developing anti-normative conducts, in addition to accepting how background cues affect the principles of the deindividuation phenomenon.
References
Perry, M. (1998). Living in a social world: Deindividuation. Psychology 324, University of Miami. Retrieve November 30, 2016, from http://www.units.miamioh.edu/psybersite/fans/deindividuation.shtml
Chang, J. (2008). The role of anonymity in deindividuated behavior: A comparison of deindividuation theory and the social identity model of deindividuation effects (SIDE). The Pulse , 6 (1), 2-8.
Li, B. (2010). The Theories of Deindividuation.
